Ahem… you see, Scott how this works is… Bush43 had to NOMINATE her, in order for a Senate hearing to occur. That Bush Jr. did not do.

All the rest he writes is clearly just butt sore whining this morning, that we now have a black female Supreme Court Justice… (Oh, the humanities!) who will simply follow existing law and precedents, rather than try to reshape the US into an Ayn Randian / Hard Right ideologue’s wet dream.

Consider that the the supposed candidate Johnson supports authored a dissent on the record in a California criminal case — claiming that black women, as a group should not be cognizable as a protected class — in short, prosecutors should be allowed to strike jurors, solely because they are black women.

I N S A N E.

Here it is:

“Brown has been critical of affirmative action and abortion rights. In People v. Robert Young, 34 Cal. 4th 1149, 1237, (2005) [see the last five pages of that link], Brown, ignoring prior precedent set by the California Supreme Court in 1985, argued that black women should not be considered as a “cognizable group” and that prosecutors could therefore “use preemptory [sic] challenges to exclude jurors solely on the basis that they are black women….”

So, not only can she not spell, but she would dis-enfranchise her own gender and race.

Sure — sure, cool story, bro — Johnson makes this argument largely because she used to teach a “Boalt Hall” (somehow fitting that she taught under a racist’s name) law practicum / extension class with Steve Hayward, and the infamous “9/11 torture memo author” John Yoo… at Berkeley. Charming.

I guess these Powerliners confirm — as they do every day with endorsements of one Candace Owens… that the only time skin color matters to them, is when they need cover for their own racism. They need the “paid” black friend defense to rush in.

Disgusting.